Dr. Muhammad Shamsaddin MegalommatisNovember 14, 2008In six previous articles, entitled “William Guthrie´s Turcomania: the Correct Name for Inexistent Kurdistan” ), “Jews and Turkmen Can Prosper Again in Tuz Khurmatu – With Turkey Annexing North Iraq” ), “Iraq´s Turkmenia to Merge with Turkey: Primary Concern of All Turks and Muslims” ), “Tombstone on Fake Kurdistan: Turkmen Political and Religious Movements in Iraq” ), “Turkmen Culture and Literature in Northern Iraq – True Identity vs. Fake Kurdish Propaganda” ) and “Protect Iraq´s Turkmen Cultural Heritage from Barbaric “Kurdish” Terrorists” ), I published the first six chapters (and parts of the lengthy seventh chapter) of an insightful book published by Mofak Salman Kerkuklu, one of the Turkmen foremost intellectuals, on “The Turkmen City of Tuz Khormatu”.As the book bears witness to the Turkmen identity of the Northern Iraqi city, it consists in an excellent refutation of disastrous plans that provide for the formation of a fake state ´Kurdistan´ which will plunge into strife and disaster the subjugated non-Kurdish nations and ethno-religious groups, either those identified as unrelated (Turkmen, Aramaean, Jewish) or those labeled “Kurds” (Zaza, Sorani, Yazidi, Ahl-e Haq, Feyli, etc.).
In the present article, I publish further parts of the vast seventh chapter, which cover the various – all colonial – phases of Modern History of Iraq with focus on Tuz Khormatu. Through an overview of Mesopotamia´s Modern History, one understands that all the problems of the various local peoples and ethno-religious groups derived from the evil colonial plans of the Apostate Freemasonic Lodge that totally controls the political establishments of England and France.What the Pseudo-Kurdish Terrorists Talabani and Barzani Fail to Understand
The Anti-Ottoman, Anti-Turkish and Anti-Muslim, Anti-Christian and Anti-Aramaean, Anti-Persian and Anti-Oriental racism, hysteria and evilness of the tyrannical, murderous and inhuman regimes of Lloyd George and Georges Clemenceau have triggered all the problems and all the disasters that have befallen on the historical peoples of the vast colonized periphery of the Ottoman Empire.In their evil plans, the colonial gangsters involved the most backward and the most ignorant tribal rulers
on whom they projected their fallacious version of History, whom they villainously and disproportionately flattered in order to turn them from unimportant mountain chieftains of non-value to significant and ludicrous clowns – pawns of their agenda (that the colonial gangsters do not however dare reveal to their puppets – slaves), with whom they planned to work, promoting disloyalty and immorality, at the detriment of the normal and rightful political authorities (the Ottoman and the Persian Empires), and at the prejudice of the outright majority of the local nations and ethno-religious groups, to whom they made favors and promises in order to shamefully utilize them and criminally instrumentalize them for their hidden agenda´s materialization, and for whom they have already reserved an abominable end full of disgrace, treachery and blood, as all the English colonials´ puppets – rulers have been killed by the same way, namely rulers´ subordinates who were also employed by the colonials as agents against their local masters.In fact, the paranoid US – EU decision to consider terrorist groups as possible interlocutors and to unwisely demonstrate predilection to unrepresentative political groups that have provenly terrorized other nations and ethno-religious groups risks triggering mass extermination of the Aramaeans, the Turkmen and others, and fomenting an incredible strife among the different peoples whom the English colonial propaganda and the criminal but idiotic chieftains Talabani and Barzani label as “Kurds”. On this issue, I will however dedicate further articles.
Here suffice it to state that the Turkmen historicity of many lands falsely claimed as ´Kurdish´ will be one of the obstacles to the evil plans of the Apostate Freemasonic Lodge to set up a bogus-state called Kurdistan that will be the Hell-on-Earth.
The Turkmen City of Tuz Khormatu
By Mofak Salman Kerkuklu
Turkmen Under the British Occupation
A key to understanding why the maintenance of Iraq’s territorial integrity is viewed by many as critical is knowledge of the country’s enormous ethnic and religious diversity, the aspirations of these groups and the problems they now face. One of these ethno‐linguistic groups is the Turkmen, who have made a major effort to define themselves, both internally and to the world community. Their real population has always been suppressed by the authorities in Iraq for political reasons and is officially estimated at 2%, whereas in reality their number should be put between 2.5 and 3 million, i.e., 12% of the Iraqi population. The Turkmen of Iraq settled in Turkmeneli. Over the centuries, Turkmen played a constructive role in Iraq, either by defending the foreign invaders or by bringing civilisation. Their monuments and architectural remains exist all over Iraq. They lived in harmony with all ethnic groups around them. They lived with justice and tolerance.The Turkmen are a Turkic group with a unique heritage and culture, as well as linguistic, historical and cultural links with the surrounding Turkic groups, such as those in Turkey and Azerbaijan. Their spoken language is closer to Azeri but their official written language is like the Turkish spoken in present‐day Turkey. The Turkmen of Iraq settled in Turkmeneli (Turkmen land) in three successive and constant migrations from Central Asia, and increased their numbers; this enabled them to establish six states in Iraq:
1. The Seljuks,
2. The Atabegs,
3. The Ilkhanids,
4. The Jalairids,
5. The Kara Koyunlu (Black Sheep),
6. The Ak Koynlu (White Sheep).
The Ak Koynlu became the last Turkmen state, in the sixteenth century. After that, the Safawids and the Ottomans ruled them.
Turkmen during the time of the Monarchy
For decades, since the creation of the Iraqi State in 1921, the Turkmen of Iraq and their plight have been completely ignored by the international community: they have been the least listened to outside Iraq and the least defended by their own government. Indeed, for decades, the Turkmen have been denied their basic human rights in Iraq, and have faced total indifference from the international community.
The disregard of the Turkmen´s historical role and achievements in Iraq, the denial of their true representation as the third largest ethnic group and, consequently, their marginalisation in Iraq have been initiated by the British colonial authorities at the end of World War One in 1918, for geopolitical and economical reasons only. This was meant to facilitate the separation of the Mosul Vilayat ´Mosul Province´ (now representing five Iraqi provinces: Mosul, Kirkuk, Erbil, Duhok and Suleymaniyah) from the Ottoman Empire (Turkey), in order to control the huge oil reserves of Kirkuk, which was then inhabited mainly by the Turkmen, as it had been for centuries.
During the 1920 uprising against the British occupation of Iraq, several Turkmen leaders appeared in the political arena in Tuz Khormatu. They have successfully participated in the uprising against the British occupation. These include Ali Efendi Mullah Wali, Najem Mohammed Chayir, Sayid Mohamed Sayid Ali, Khurshid Bakir Agha, Qanber Hussein Agha, Wahab Rustum Agha, Ali Mullah Safer, Jalal Rashid Efendi, Kasim Mohammed Suleyman, Moussa Qanber Agha, Hassan Maruf, Mullah Mehdi Khalil, Fadhil Mullah Mustafa, Rashid Khalifa Aldaqooqi and Abbass Kahya. Also, during the uprising in Tuz Khormatu, Mohammed Al‐Ferhan Albayeti and the chief of the Bayat Tribe Faris Beg provided the demonstrators with logistical support and arms.[1]
However, after the British invasion of Iraq in 1918, the Turkmen began to experience a different situation. The Turkmen were branded unjustly as loyal to Turkey: they were removed from the administration, pushed into isolation and ignored. Then, their fundamental human rights in culture and education were violated by the closure of their schools between 1933 and 1937.
Under the constitution, drawn up in 1932, the Kurds and the Turkmen had the right to use their own languages in schools and government offices and to have their own language press. With the Arabs, the Kurds were recognised in the first constitution of monarchical Iraq as one of the three main component groups of the Iraqi nation. However, constitutional rights were acknowledged to minorities in Iraq and the Royal Constitution of 21st March 1925 and the Article 16: “As determined by a general programme prescribed by law, each of the minorities originating from various nations has the right to set up schools where education is provided in the language used by that minority and is entitled to be in charge of these schools”. It was stated in the Royal Constitution, which was valid until 1958, that the Iraqi State consisted of Arabs, Kurds, Turkmen and other minorities.
Moreover, according to Article 14 of the same constitution, Turkmen, like other minorities, were also entitled to receive an education in their own language and to be in charge of their own educational institutions. In fact, until the proclamation of the republic, various constitutional amendments did not cause ethnic or political discrimination. However, in 1933, the final version of Article 17 of the constitution declared Arabic as the official language, with legally defined exceptions. Legislation number 74, published in 1931, and entitled Native Languages had clearly stipulated these exceptions. This law permitted all judicial processes to be conducted in the Turkmen language and primary school education to be in the Turkish language in all areas where Turkmen lived, foremost among these being Kirkuk and Erbil, and these rights were under constitutional guarantee. However, in 1936, after the resignation of Hikmat Suleiman, the brother of Sadrazam (Chief Minister) Mahmud Shavket Pasha, from the post of Prime Minister, to which he was appointed two years before, the new military regime began a campaign of taking back the rights given by the constitution. Thus, the Turkmen of Iraq lost the right to be educated in their native tongue. Under the Iraqi constitution of 1925, both Turkmen and Kurds had the right to use their own languages in schools, government offices and press.By 1972, the Iraqi government prohibited both the study of the Turkmen language and Turkmen media and in 1973, any reference to the Turkmen was omitted from the provisional constitution. During the 1980s, the regime, the Ba´ath Party, prohibited even public use of the Turkmen language and the constitution of 1990 only states that the ´people of Iraq´ consist of ´Arabs and Kurds´.
However, one of the historical tragedies carried out against the Turkmen in Tuz Khormatu during the Monarchy was the uprising ´Intifada´ of June 6, 1954. The uprising commenced when the people of the district and the adjacent villages were frustrated by the election games practiced by the Iraqi government, which was assigning its supporters in the parliaments as representatives for the different constituencies. The Turkmen residents of Tuz Khormatu decided to show their unity and try to prevent possible the rigging of the election results. Therefore, they demanded free and integral elections, away from the governments´ influences and government candidates.[2]
In the elections held in June 1954, there were two candidates, Mr Jihad Al Wandawi and Mr Zaynal Abdeen Al Hajj Qanber Agha, who were accepted by the Tuz Khormatu people to represent them in the Parliament. The Election centres in the constituency were held in the Employees´ Club and the Tuz Khormatu elementary school.
The voting began at six o´clock in the morning and after a few hours, it was evident to the people that the government was supporting and proffering Mr Jihad Al Wandawi, thus ignoring the principle of neutrality and implementing the orders of the central powers in Baghdad. The supporters of Mr Zaynal Abdin Al Hajj Qanber Agha objected and protested to the authorities that there were people being brought in to vote for Mr Jihad Al Wandawi more than once. The people of Tuz Khormatu objected in writing to the District Commissioner, demanding that he investigate the issue. The Commissioner issued an order to arrest the campaign manager of the Turkmen candidate, Haji Mubarak Hassan.[3] The people realised that things were going from bad to worse and in their fury they attacked the election centres and destroyed the ballot boxes.[4]
People noticed that in the first polling centre, in the Employees´ Club, there were armed forces trying to intimidate the crowds and prevent them from advancing but that was of no use, for the crowds continued marching. The unarmed protesters started to stone the armed troops in the Club, thus forcing the troops to seek shelter in nearby gardens and the clashes continued between the people and the outsiders, who were totally committed to making the government´s candidate win the elections. The troops started shooting at the protesters and killed Suleiman Ali, one of the original inhabitants of Tuz Khormatu. This was clear evidence for the Turkmen of the denial that was being forged.
The period of monarchy, from 1932 to 1958, saw the removal of Turkmen from government posts and their deportation to Arab areas. The suppression of the Turkmen peaked in 1946, when they were subjected to what is historically known as the Gawer Baghi massacre when the police opened fire on unarmed protesters among the Iraqi oil workers in Kirkuk. Since then, and despite the formal independence of Iraq from Great Britain and the end of the British mandate in 1932, successive Iraqi governments have applied the same policies of marginalisation and discrimination towards the Turkmen as those that were initiated and applied by the British in 1918 and for the same geopolitical and economical reasons!
The Abdul Karim Qasim Period (1958–1963)
The military coup of 1958 that toppled the monarchy first brought rays of hope for the Turkmen when they heard radio announcements by coup leader General Abdul Kerim Qasim and his deputy General Abdul Salam Arif that Iraq was made up of three main ethnic groups and Turkmen were one of them. Turkmen interpreted these statements as the end of the suppression.However, happy days did not last long. After the coup of 1958, General Abdul Kerim Qasim declared an amnesty and, because of this, a Kurdish rebel leader Mullah Mustafa Barzani returned from the Soviet Union and started negotiating for a Kurdish autonomous region. The situation of the Turkmen has deteriorated dramatically and drastically because of the hegemonic ambitions of Kurdish rebel leader Mullah Mustafa Barzani and his plans for an independent Kurdish state in the north of Iraq, for which the oil wealth of Kirkuk was not only a necessity but also the main motivation. The existence of Turkmen in the north of Iraq, side‐by‐side with the Kurds, and the Turkmen presence in great numbers in Kirkuk, where for centuries, they represented the majority, were seen and felt by Mullah Mustafa Barzani as obstacles to the realisation of his dreams for an independent Kurdish state and the control of Kirkuk’s oil wealth.
During the time of General Abdul Karim Qasim, the Turkmen suffered marginalisation and discrimination from both the Kurds and the Iraqi communists who dominated the regime in Iraq. They faced internal deportation, exile, arbitrary arrest and detention, confiscation of properties and agricultural land and worst of all, the massacre of 120 of their intellectuals and community leaders on the eve of the first anniversary of the revolution on 14th July 1959 by Kurdish rebel leader Mullah Mustafa Barzani and his Kurdish followers allied to the Iraqi communists. Kirkuk was put under curfew and its population slaughtered by Communists and Kurds. The streets of Kirkuk were filled with blood and witnessed one of its more brutal moments in history. The Turkmen in Kirkuk were attacked under the false pretext that they helped the Mosul resistance against the central government. The Kirkuk massacre was totally disregarded by the world and the whole of humanity ignored it.
It was only after this massacre that the Communist Kurds became aggressive enough to negotiate for inclusion of Kirkuk in their autonomous region. During this period (1958–1963), a mass migration of the Kurds, from their villages and towns in the north‐east of Iraq to the Turkmen region and especially to the cities of Kirkuk and Tuz Khormatu, were organised and implemented in order to increase Kurdish presence in Kirkuk and alter the demography of this large Turkmen city.
Notes
1 Brief Turkmen History Mowjez Tarih Al-Turkmen, by Shakir Sabri Alzabit, published by Matbaat al-almaarif, part one, pages 137–138, Baghdad, 19602 Ersad Hurmuzli, Hakikat al-Wojood al-Turkmenifi al_Iraq, (The existence of the Turkmen in Iraq), page 215, first edition, boyut.Tan.Mat, Ankara, 2005.
3 Ersad Hurmuzli, Hakikat al-Wojood al-Turkmenifi al_Iraq, (The existence of the Turkmen in Iraq), page 217, first edition, boyut. Tan.Mat, Ankara, 2005
4 Ersad Hurmuzli, Hakikat al-Wojood al-Turkmenifi al_Iraq, (The existence of the Turkmen in Iraq), page 216, first edition, boyut. Tan.Mat, Ankara, 2005
Note
Picture: Tuz Khurmatu Castle in 1918, at the beginning of the calamitous colonial period that has not yet ended.
Category: Middle East & Africa
-
Iraqi Turkmen History Reveals Plan to Create a Bogus – Kurdish Nation
-
Turkey’s diplomatic offensive: no time for second thoughts
By The Daily Star
Iran’s expression of open-mindedness to Turkish mediation between itself and the United States is the latest evidence of Ankara’s increasing indispensability, at least for those who prefer negotiated solutions over imposed remedies for the Middle East’s many quandaries. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been especially active in recent months, parlaying improvements in Turkey’s relations with Syria to broker contacts between that country and Israel, for instance, and working behind the scenes to help defuse tensions in Lebanon this past May. These endeavors have been acutely helpful given the poor state of ties between the West and Syria, which until the past few years had positioned itself a bridge between Iran and France. With Damascus only now emerging from isolation imposed since 2005, Turkey’s role has been essential, and Erdogan has not limited it to the Middle East: He has also sought to make Turkey a fulcrum for the development of cooperation in the Caucasus.
The strategy is not without risks: Every project Ankara adopts stretches its diplomatic resources and creates expectations. The potential payoffs, however, are enormous: Apart from the general shared benefits to be derived from greater stability in its neighborhood, Turkey also stands to reap considerable revenues from pipelines crossing its territory from areas previously seen as untouchables because of their instability and/or poor relationships with other partners. This is not to mention all the goodwill that the Turks stand to generate by helping to end conflicts among its neighbors or between some of them and outside powers.
Turkey’s conspicuous raising of its public profile means that its prestige is invested, and Erdogan has taken something of a personal gamble by doing what many hope US President-elect Barack Obama will do when he takes office in January: He has de-emphasized interactions with some of Turkey’s traditional partners and turned away from some of the policy priorities pursued by successive governments before his. His own reputation is therefore in play, and by extension that of his party – which has not been without determined enemies at home.
Given all of the foregoing, this is no time for second thoughts. Turkey needs to undertake even more of the active diplomacy that Erdogan has overseen if it is to meet the expectations it has created at home and abroad. Overall, no country is better-equipped to serve as a moderator in a “dialogue of civilizations” that is more necessary than ever. And if Obama fulfills even part of his promise as an agent for change, Erdogan might even have an enthusiastic colleague in the White House.
#
-
Protect Iraq’s Turkmen Cultural Heritage from Barbaric “Kurdish” Terrorists
by Dr. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis
November 13, 2008In five previous articles, entitled “William Guthrie´s Turcomania: the Correct Name for Inexistent Kurdistan” ), “Jews and Turkmen Can Prosper Again in Tuz Khurmatu – With Turkey Annexing North Iraq” ), “Iraq´s Turkmenia to Merge with Turkey: Primary Concern of All Turks and Muslims” ), “Tombstone on Fake Kurdistan: Turkmen Political and Religious Movements in Iraq” ), and “Turkmen Culture and Literature in Northern Iraq – True Identity vs. Fake Kurdish Propaganda” ), I published the first five chapters of an insightful book published by Mofak Salman Kerkuklu, one of the Turkmen foremost intellectuals, on “The Turkmen City of Tuz Khormatu”.
As the book bears witness to the Turkmen identity of the Northern Iraqi city, it consists in an excellent refutation of disastrous plans that provide for the formation of a fake state ´Kurdistan´ which will plunge into strife and disaster the subjugated non-Kurdish nations and ethno-religious groups, either those identified as unrelated (Turkmen, Aramaean, Jewish) or those labeled “Kurds” (Zaza, Sorani, Yazidi, Ahl-e Haq, Feyli, etc.).
In the present article, I publish the book´s sixth and seventh chapters, which are dedicated to the historical places and the social life in Tuz Khormatu, in Northern Iraq. Through various testimonies, the unbreakable interconnection with Turkey and the Ottoman Empire, Azerbaijan and Central Asia is highlighted.
This chapter´s subject is politically critical because the international community, and more particularly the US – for the time they plan or will be able to sustain US soldiers there – are responsible for the preservation of the Turkmen cultural identity and heritage in the US-occupied North Iraq.
The paranoid US – EU decision to consider terrorist groups as possible interlocutors and to unwisely demonstrate predilection to unrepresentative political groups that have provenly terrorized other nations and ethno-religious groups risks leading to situations encountered in Taleban Afghanistan, involving destruction of culturally significant sites and archeological places within a project of elimination of the targeted nations´ and ethno-religious groups´ proofs of historicity and historical prevalence over the fabricated nation “Kurds”. In this regard, several Turkmen, Aramaean (mistakenly called ´Assyrian´), Yazidi and Mandaean sites should be immediately included into the World Heritage List of the UNESCO (see: .
The Turkmen historicity of many lands falsely claimed as ´Kurdish´ will be one of the obstacles to the evil plans of the Apostate Freemasonic Lodge to set up a bogus-state called Kurdistan that will be the Hell-on-Earth.
The Turkmen City of Tuz Khormatu
By Mofak Salman Kerkuklu
Historical places in Tuz Khormatu
The history of Tuz Khormatu goes back to ancient times. There are several temples, shrines and historical places in Tuz Khormatu, which I would like to mention.
6.1 Gawer Kalasi (Christian Castle)
One of the most important historical places in Tuz Khormatu to visit is the Gawer Kalasi, which means ´Christian castle´ in the Turkmen language. The history of the castle goes back to the Assyrian era. The Gawer Kalasi is located at the top of the Murtada Riza Mountain, which overlooks the Ak Su River, opposite the Tuzlug.
6.2 The Shrine of the Sepulcher of Imam Murtada
The shrine of the sepulcher of Imam Murtada is located on the top of the Mursa Ali Dagi (´Mursa Ali Mountain´), overlooking the Ak Su River. The shrine was deliberately destroyed by the previous Ba´ath regime. After the toppling of Saddam Hussein´s regime, the shrine was rebuilt with donations from the people of Tuz Khormatu. The local Turkmen people restored the shrine with the consent of the Tuz Khormatu councilor, and the permission and knowledge of the Deputy Governor of Kirkuk; however, the Kurdish militia, who are attached to the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, destroyed the sepulcher of Imam Murtada on the 23rd August, 2003. The destruction of the shrine led to a big protest by the Turkmen in the district, which resulted in the death of seven Turkmen, who were shot by the Kurdish militia when they opened fire on the civilian Turkmen protestors.
6.3 Ottoman Mosque (Eski Osmanli Camesi)
There are several historical mosques in the city of Tuz Khormatu and one of these is the Eski Osmanli Camesi ´Ottoman Mosque´. The mosque was built in the era of Sultan Abdulhamid the Second, in 1887. The Eski Osmanli Camesi is located next to the Baglar Tuker River and opposite the Umuma Ve Tufula Clinic (the ´general baby clinic´). The Eski Osmanli Mosque consists of several rooms, libraries and a visitors´ room and has a huge garden. Mullah Mohammed, a religious figure, was the first Imam to preach in the mosque; he was followed by Mullah Taha. After the death of Mulla Taha, his son, Mullah Cemal, was appointed as imam of the mosque on the 25th of April 1925.[1]
Mullah Cemal Taha was born in 1906. He was very active, hospitable, kind and extremely generous. He believed in reformation in society. He was also very explicit and knowledgeable in explaining the Holy Koran and he was a well known poet in the area.
6.4 Shrine of the Sepulcher of Imam Ahmet
The shrine of the sepulcher of Imam Ahmet and his graveyard are located in east Tuz Khormatu. The shrine of the sepulcher of Imam Ahmet dates back to the family of Imam Moussa Al_Kazim. The shrine is visited by the people and has a tremendous religious value in Turkmen Shi’aa society.
6.5 The Great Prophet Mosque and Husseiniya Tuz Al_Kabir
The Great Prophet Mosque and Husseinieh Tuz Al kabir were both built with local donations and the mosque is located in the Husseinieh Bazaar. The Husseinieh was originally a house belonging to a religious figure, Kazim Khalow El Assaf, but he had no next of kin. After his death, in his will, he donated his house to the mosque. The house was then converted to a mosque in 1926. The conversion was carried out with the help of local donations and the religious figure Sheikh Mohammed Ali Al Kenchi was appointed as the first Imam of the mosque in 1960. He later moved and settled in Baghdad and his positioned was filled by Sheikh Ibrahim Al Mushkini. [2]
The Husseinieh Tuz Al kabir was continuously refurbished by local donations and has been used continuously by the locals for religious festivals and especially during the fasting month of Ramadan and the months of Muharram Al haram and Seffer, which are very important months for the Muslim people.
6.6 Shrine of the Sepulcher of Imam Hassan
The shrine of the sepulcher of Imam Hassan is located in the north of the Tuz Khormatu district.
6.7 Imam Ali Mosque (Cami Albaghdadi)
Jewad Kazim Al Bahgdadi knows the Imam Ali Mosque as the Al Bahgdadi Mosque. It was built in 1966. The mosque consists of several rooms, including a library and a reception room and has a huge garden. Imam Sheikh Ghulam Ali Sekhendan was appointed as the first Imam of the mosque. The mosque was administered by Haj Mohammed Ahmed Beyrakdar.
The mosque is located in the Safer neighborhood near the shrine of Shah Ma´asuma and a Husseinieh is attached to the mosque.
In addition, there is another well known historical mosque, named the Al Cumhuriya Mosque, which is located in the Al Cumhuriya neighborhood on the main road of the district. The mosque was built in 1982. Moreover, there are other mosques in the district: dating back to 1250, such as the Bagi Mosque, Kinar Teppe Mosque and Imam Ahmet Mosque. [3]
6.8 Diwan Khana Qanber Agha
The Diwan Khana Qanber Agha is located on the Buyuk Arkh River opposite the house that was built by the well known builder Usta Said in 1923 for the Haj Qanber.
The Diwan Khana Qanber Agha was used as a hospice for visitors from various places. In addition, it has been used by the local population as a gathering point, to discuss and solve problems that have occurred among the public. After the death of the Haj Qanber, his son Zaynal Abdin Agha took over. The ruins of the Diwan Khana are still present in the area. [4]
6.9 Ulu Teppe and Pesh Permak
One of the historical places in Tuz Khormatu is Ulu Teppa (Ulu Hill). Ulu Teppe is five metres high and the site has been registered as a historical place by the Iraqi archaeological office. Archaeological excavations in the Ulu Teppe area are still in process.
Another historical site in the north east of Ulu Teppe is called Bes Permak, which means ´Five Fingers´ in the Turkmen language; the building looks like five fingers and the place is built from bricks. There is some suggestion by historians that the building was used for food preparation by the people living in the Gawer Kalasi (´the castle of the Christians´). This site dates back to the Khoriyeen Era. [5]
In addition, on the main road towards the Turkmen sub‐district named Yenkija, substantial historical remains, such as pottery and broken bricks, have been found by Iraqi archaeologists in the area named Tasli Teppe, which means ´Rock Hill´ in the Turkmen language.
Archaeological excavations in this area are still in process and the site has been registered as a historical place at the Iraqi archaeological office. [6]
6.10 The Jewish Synagogue (Torah)
The Jewish Synagogue in Tuz Khormatu is located next to the Buyuk Arkh – which means ´the Big Stream´ in the Turkmen language – on the east of the Tuz Khormatu district. The history of Jewish Synagogue in Tuz Khormatu goes back to the 1307H. The Jews who were living in area built the Synagogue.
The Synagogue consists of several rooms and a large hall and is 12 × 8 square metres. The shape of the Star of David is built in the ceiling of the hall. A swimming pool was built next to the Jewish Synagogue, which was used on Saturdays by the Jewish community as a part of their religious worship.[7]
There is also a Jewish graveyard, bearing names such as ´Makberat Alyahud´, which is loca ted at the site of the Shuala School. The graveyard was converted to government buildings and agricultural offices after the emigration of the Jews from Tuz Khormatu in 1951. [8]
6.11 Dokuz Daglik
One of the historical places in Tuz Khormatu is Dukuz Daglik, which means ´nine mountains´ in the Turkmen language and is located at the east of the Murtada Ali Dagi (Murtada Ali Mountain). There is a series of caves embedded inside of the mountain: these caves were used as a hiding place during World War One. [9]
6.12 Buyuk Kayseri and Buyuk Kan
The Khan and the Marquee at the Kayseri Bazaar is known as Khan Canet Casim. Sheikler Hassan built it; he originally came from the Tisin neighborhood in the city of Kirkuk. The Khan is linked to several shops inside the Kayseri Bazaar. There are over 30 highly decorative shops within the closed market. These shops were built in 1863; they have also been used as resting and exchange point for storing commodities. [10]
Social life in Tuz Khormatu
Turkmen society in Tuz Khormatu is very family oriented; people living in the district are almost related to each other, and the old family lines are preserved to date.
The population of the district before the 1960s could be considered as one big family, in that everyone helps each other and provides aid for the welfare of the needy, even nowadays.
In fact, the overwhelming population in Tuz Khormatu are related to each other; intermarriages among families and relatives are common. The society in the district is based on helping and providing aid to each other, visiting the sick and providing help for those in need. Religious buildings, such as Al hussieniya, have been used regularly for celebration and for family gatherings.
Notes
1. Salahaddin Najioglu, Tuz Khormatu Kadiman and Hadithin, published in Tuz Khormatu, Iraq, 16/3/1972, page 86
2. Salahaddin Najioglu, Tuz Khormatu Kadiman and Hadithin, published in Tuz Khormatu, Iraq, 16/3/1972, page 52
3. Ibid, page 53
4. Salahaddin Najioglu, Tuz Khormatu Kadiman and Hadithin, published in Tuz Khormatu, Iraq, 16/3/1972, page 66
5. Salahaddin Najioglu, Tuz Khormatu Kadiman and Hadithin, published in Tuz Khormatu, Iraq, 16/3/1972, page 65
6. Ibid, page 65
7. Ibid, page 65
8. Ibid, page 65
9. Ibid, page 66
10. Salahaddin Najioglu, Tuz Khormatu Kadiman and Hadithin, published in Tuz Khormatu, Iraq, 16/3/1972, page 66
Note
Picture: Tuz Khurmatu socializing: Ilangoz Akber, Nuri Fatah Pasha, Qanber Effendi, Rashid Sadik Cayir and Mahdi Ali Effendi, 1960
-
No restriction for expansion of Iran-Turkey ties: president
Tehran, Nov 17, IRNAPresident Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Sunday evening that there is no obstacle in the way of further expansion of Tehran-Ankara all-out cooperation.
In a meeting with the visiting Turkish Energy Minister Hilmi Guler, he expressed hope that bilateral relations would further boost in all areas.
Terming his August visit to Turkey as a crucial and determining visit, the president said the visit was in line with the two countries mutual interest.
During Ahmadinejad’s visit to Turkey, a joint statement was issued by the two sides stressing the importance of energy in economic development of the two states.
The two sides agreed to promote the level of cooperation in the fields of energy, gas and oil to the highest level and try to finalize agreements signed between the two capitals in 2007 and 2008 to this end.
Guler expressed his satisfaction with the current level of cooperation between the two neighboring states.
He reiterated that Ankara attaches great importance to expansion of ties with Tehran.
The Turkish energy minister further called for materialization of the agreements reached between the two sides.
Guler, heading a delegation, arrived in Tehran Saturday evening to finalize a gas accord with Iranian officials.
-
ERDOGAN VISITS THE UNITED STATES: ECONOMY AND RELATIONS WITH OBAMA ON THE AGENDA
By Saban Kardas
Monday, November 17, 2008
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan visited the United States to attend the G-20 Summit, where he joined the leaders of developed and industrializing nations to discuss the global financial crisis. In addition to his participation in the summit activities, Erdogan held bilateral meetings with several world leaders.In his public statements throughout the trip, Erdogan underlined the importance of international cooperation in fighting the global crisis. Having emphasized the experience that Turkey had gathered from its own economic recovery programs as a result of the devastating crises of the 1990s and early-2000s, Erdogan maintained that his country represented a hope and a model for those countries seeking a way out of the current crisis (www.akparti.org.tr, November 13; Yeni Safak, November 16).
These inflated statements aside, how the AKP government will cope with the global financial crisis and whether it will seek help from the IMF had been matters of debate (EDM, October 31). Since the AKP came to power in 2002, reducing Turkey’s dependence on the IMF has been one of the government’s primary economic goals. The AKP has been arguing that Turkey could overcome the current crisis without significant support from the international community. Since the previous stand-by agreement with the IMF expired in May, Turkey has been resisting another arrangement with the IMF because of the strict fiscal conditions it would impose (New York Times, November 7).
During the G-20 Summit Erdogan met with Managing Director of the IMF Dominique Strauss-Kahn on November 14, and their teams had additional talks on November 15. Erdogan also met the President of the World Bank Robert Zoellick. The World Bank is expected to increase credits to Turkey to support various projects dealing with small and medium-sized enterprises and renewable energy (www.cnnturk.com; Anatolian Agency, November 15).
The statements coming from both sides following the meeting between Erdogan and Strauss-Kahn indicate that Turkey might be reversing its stubborn position on IMF aid. Both parties stressed that Turkey would maintain cooperation with the IMF in the future. Economic sources speculated that a new stand-by agreement worth $15 to $20 billion might be signed soon, although differences of opinion remain about the extent and kind of IMF aid to Turkey (www.tgrthaber.com.tr, November 16; Today’s Zaman, November 17). Experts believe that the decision, albeit late, to start negotiations with the IMF is a step in the right direction (Referans, November 17).
Erdogan also gave two public talks, in which he outlined the parameters of the new activism in Turkish foreign policy and Turkey’s strategic partnership with the United States, as well as developments in domestic politics. On November 13 Erdogan spoke at a conference at Columbia University, entitled “Turkey’s Role in Shaping the Future” (www.ntvmsnbc.com, November 14). On November 14 Erdogan discussedTurkish foreign policy at the Brookings Institution. During these addresses, he congratulated U.S. President-elect Barack Obama and emphasized that Turkey was ready to work with the new administration, provided that it was sensitive to Turkey’s priorities.
On relations with Armenia, Erdogan repeated Turkey’s position that the issue must be dealt with by the parties concerned through channels of dialogue already established. He warned the incoming administration not to let ethnic lobbies dictate American policy and spoil bilateral relations between Turkey and the United States (Hurriyet Daily News, November 17).
On the issue of nuclear proliferation and Iran, Erdogan highlighted Turkey’s new-found role as peace broker and criticized U.S.-led efforts against Tehran. Earlier in the week, the New York Times reported that Erdogan had offered to mediate between Iran and the incoming Obama administration (New York Times, November 11). During his talk at the Brookings Institution, Erdogan said that given the trust Turkey had built up with Iran, it was better positioned than the EU’s troika to facilitate talks with Tehran. Some of his remarks on this issue were, however, more controversial. Erdogan maintained that trying to force Iran to drop its nuclear program while other countries maintained nuclear arsenals was no ground for reducing tension. He instead urged the countries pressuring Iran to eliminate such weapons themselves, which would be a better basis for a comprehensive solution (www.cnnturk.com, November 15). Erdogan’s call for “total nuclear disarmament” has been criticized as a fundamental deviation from Turkey’s official position (Milliyet, November 15).
On the issue of Iraq, Erdogan emphasized Turkey’s positive contributions to the reconstruction efforts there. He criticized Obama for setting a clear exit date, however. He expressed concerns about a premature American withdrawal, arguing that Iraq’s infrastructure had not matured enough. (Cihan Haber Ajansi, November 14). U.S. State Department Deputy Spokesman Robert Wood criticized Erdogan’s assessment as overly pessimistic (Washington Times, November 15).
There were questions about whether Erdogan would meet Obama during the trip; but because Obama has decided not to meet foreign leaders before his inauguration, Erdogan searched out people who were likely to shape Obama’s policies. In a separate meeting during his visit, Erdogan met with Obama’s advisers Madeline Albright, Jim Leach, and Philip Gordon (Yeni Safak, November 15). Some Turkish observers believe that the choice of the Brookings Institute as the venue of Erdogan’s speech in Washington, D.C., was also part of Turkey’s attempts to influence the incoming administration. Veteran journalist Cengiz Candar noted that despite its non-partisan position, Brookings was regarded as a pro-Democrat organization and many Brookings specialists, such as Philip Gordon, who were familiar with Turkey may end up working in the new administration (Referans, November 15; Today’s Zaman, November 17). Another senior analyst, Semih Idiz, however, argued that Erdogan’s controversial statements on Iran might ironically rock the boat, just as Erdogan was seeking to build bridges (Milliyet, November 17).
Only time will tell whether “think-tank diplomacy” will put Turkish-American relations on the right track. In any case, given Erdogan’s critical position on Obama’s declared policies, it will be interesting to see how the new administration will manage relations with Turkey.
-
Obama’s Foreign Policy Adviser Brzezinski about Obama
“Very different from most American politicians”
© Mandel Ngan/AFP Zbigniew Brzezinski: "I cannot imagine another country which could have elected someone as uniquely different as Barack Obama is." He was Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor, a hawk in terms of foreign policy. In an interview with Stern magazine Zbigniew Brzezinski explains why President-elect Obama reminds him of John F. Kennedy, what he expects from the new administration’s foreign policy – and why the US will demand a greater European military commitment in Afghanistan
Dr. Brzezinksi, as one of Washington’s ultimate insiders you have witnessed many presidential elections. How did you experience Obama’s victory last Tuesday?I was with friends, watching television. I had predicted his win. But when it actually really happened, it was exactly 11.01 p.m., I was very moved.
You? During your time as National Security Advisor, you were regarded to be one of the toughest politicians ever.I saw the faces of so many citizens, black and white, reacting to their choice. And it just dramatized to me, that this was really a historically significant election. We might witness the birth of a 21st century America. In fact, this election could define America as the prototype of an eventual global society.
And why should this be America?I cannot imagine another country, neither in Europe, neither in Asia, which could have elected someone as uniquely different as Barack Obama is. Barack Hussein Obama is accepted and cherished, really cherished, because he epitomizes the unique diversity of American society and shares the dominant values of that society.
Which are?Racial equality, a basic commitment to democracy, a notion of elementary social justice. The notion that some people should not be allowed to be as poor as they are – and that some are not entitled be quite as rich as they think they can be.
Don’t you expect a little too much from a relatively inexperienced Senator from Illinois?I met him last year, and he made the best impression on me of anyone since John F. Kennedy. He is better equipped in intellect and temperament for the highest office than anyone I can think of in recent memory. He is very different from most American politicians.
What makes him so unique?A kind of intellectual self-confidence, which reflects real intelligence, not arrogance. A friendliness – but with a distance and a dignity. A little patrician, almost. And a calculating rationality. He does not wave the do-gooders flag. He is an idealist, but not an ideologue. He knows, that compromises will be needed.
Will Obama be the President of a superpower in decline?No. That’s nonsense and often said with a lot of schadenfreude. The matter of fact is, that the era of American superpower stupidity is over, the time of self-isolation. Under President Bush, we acted arrogant, unilateralist and – worst of all – driven by fear. A culture of fear was cultivated by this administration, which replaced the Statue of Liberty as a symbol for America with Guantanamo. America has lost its confidence. This is one of the worst legacies of the Bush era. But that will come to an end now, very quickly.
Obama already claims the dawn of a new American leadership. How could he achieve this while the country faces the worst economical crisis since 70 years?He will inherit a grim reality. But the painful financial crisis also teaches us an important lesson: without America the world is in trouble. If America is declining, the rest of the world is falling apart. And have no illusions: the German economy will not recover without an American recovery. America can recover without Germany. At the same time, we understand: we have to cooperate with the world in order to do well.
What will be the biggest foreign policy challenges for the new President?Afghanistan is certainly one of them. There, for he time being, we would need to deploy more troops. But more soldiers are not the solution. The solution is a demilitarization of our engagement.
By negotiating with the Taliban, as Obama already indicated?By negotiating wit the various groups of Taliban. We should be able to reach local and regional arrangements with them. If they would stop al-Qaeda activities, for example, we would locally disengage.
You are promoting a de facto withdrawal of Nato troops?No. Nato has to continue our military activities in the meantime. And if we are serious about our alliance and about consultations, we have to be also serious about sharing burdens. You cannot have arrangements, where some soldiers risk their lives day and night and some soldiers cannot even go on patrols at night. That is not an alliance.
Will Obama expect more engagement from Europe, Germany?The American people expect this. If the Europeans want to give us only nice advise, but expect us to do the heavy lifting – then don’t expect America necessarily to listen to these advises. Europeans will no longer have the alibi of Bush’s bad policy. But let’s be clear: there are no alibis for us any more, either. We will have to consult, share decisions and cooperate.
Russia’s President greeted Obama by announcing he would deploy short range missiles along the Baltic Sea.Yes, but I think we can relax.
Relax?Russia is a country with enormous problems. Its leaders should know, that Russia cannot isolate itself from the world or base its foreign policy on the assertion that it is entitled to an imperialist sphere of influence. It is baffling to me, how unintelligent its leaders are. Self-isolation will be destructive for Russia, not for us.
Would you suggest relaxing also in regard to Iran and its nuclear ambitions?We need a more realistic, a more flexible and sensible approach. We should negotiate; we might negotiate even without preconditions. A successful approach to Iran has to accommodate its security interests and ours. This new diplomatic approach could help bring Iran back into its traditional role of strategic cooperation with the United States in stabilizing the Gulf region. This would be a sensible path.
Interview: Katja Gloger
Source: www.stern.de, 14. November 2008